Skip to content Skip to navigation
University of Warwick
  • Study
  • |
  • Research
  • |
  • Business
  • |
  • Alumni
  • |
  • News
  • |
  • About
  • Text only
  • |
  • Sign in
  • Search Philosophy
  • Search University of Warwick
  • Search for people at Warwick
  • Search Warwick Blogs
  • Search past exam papers
  • Search video
  • More…

    Department of Philosophy

    • News and Events
    • Undergraduate Study
    • Postgraduate Study
    • Research
    • People
    • Contact Us
    • Activities »
    • The CIBB Project »
    • CIIB Workshops
    University of Warwick

    CIIB Workshops


    prog



    First two-day workshop of the CIBB Project ('Contemporary Issues in Bioethics and Biopolitics')


    'The Normal and the Pathological' 

    27th and 28th September 2011


    MS.05 (second floor) Zeeman Building, The University of Warwick.

    Please note that all the papers will be delivered in English.

    All welcome. Free registration at normalpathological@gmail.com


    Confirmed speakers: Jean-Claude Dumoncel, Robert Bernasconi, Bill Fulford, Frederic Worms, Julien Pieron, Florence Caeymaex, Guillaume Leblanc, John Protevi, Charles T.Wolfe and Giuseppe Bianco.


    From a philosophical perspective, the problem of illness can be seen to emerge from the tension between the subjective (a life which is mine) and objective dimensions of life. On the one hand, illness is irreducible to an objective fact, as if independent of the subjectivity which it affects; on the other hand, it is irreducible to a mere signification, and cannot be understood independently of its inscription within a living organism, its relation to an environment, and even the effort, on the part of other living beings, to know and treat it. Illness is a qualitative and individual experience that takes place within human life itself. Once we recognise the specificity of illness in those terms, can we not arrive at an understanding of life, and the normal, on the basis of the pathological, and not as what is simply threatened and, ultimately, annihilated by it? Similarly, should medicine not recognize in care (and its latin etymology cura) the ethical implications of the internal tension of life and not isolate the pathology from the subjectivity in which it is rooted?

    Far from being of interest only to biology and medicine, the question of the normal and the pathological implicates our perception of life as a whole, in all its forms. Pathology is at the source of all questioning concerned with life. It's only on the basis of suffering and distress, which are the signs of illness, that every question regarding life, or what living human beings consider normal at a given stage of their history, and the conditions under which such a state can be maintained, becomes possible. "Health is life in the silence of the organs," wrote Leriche. This means that all discourse of life on life spring from that obscure moment when, confronted with an obstacle, life "speaks" or seeks to speak. To the extent that our purpose is to ask about life, we need to begin by asking about life's relation to the pathological, and the epistemological, ethical and political implications of such a relation.

    After the classical contributions of Canguilhem and Foucault, we are convinced that it is possible, and indeed necessary, to extend and adapt the reflection of the philosophy of pathology in the light of the new challenges emerging from the evolution of society and the life sciences. In the era of bio-power, the norms have become independent of the normative power of the human being, determining its comportments and excluding those considered pathological. To what extent is it possible to emphasise and promote the normative activity of human life in the face of a system that declares in advance, and down to the most minute details, what is normal? What paradigm of normality and health can we develop as an alternative to auto-immunisation, this disease caused by the excess of concern for health? What critical space is left, or can be generated, in an epoch in which the life sciences make it possible for the human being to intervene on itself, on other living beings, and determine their identity? Is it still possible to develop a normative critique that would not be rooted in the naturalistic paradigm?


    Second two-day workshop of the CIBB Project ('Contemporary Issues in Bioethics and Biopolitics')


    ‘Ageing and Dying’

    Venice, Palazzo Papafava

    15th and 16th of September 2012


    Open to the public FREE of charge.

    (you are advised to register your interest in attending the workshop with Marjorie Gracieuse at m.gracieuse@gmail.com)


    Confirmed speakers: Keith Ansell-Pearson, Howard Caygill, Paul-Antoine Miquel, Steve Fuller, Christina Howells, Claudia Stein, Guillaume Le blanc, Piergiorgio Donatelli, Frederic Worms, Tom Kirkwood.

     

    Please note that all the papers will be delivered in English.

    This two-day workshop will take place at the Palazzo Papafava, Calle de la Rachetta Cannaregio 3764, 30121 Venezia Italy.

    Directions to the Palazzo Papafava

    Travelling to Venice

    Accommodation (please book with the hotel directly).

    Human life is mortal life. This ontological claim, in turn, presupposes an epistemological, ethical, and political revolution: if death is not simply outside life, but creates a tension within life itself, then death itself needs fully to be integrated within our lives, private and public, individual and political. There needs to be a politics of birth, death and ageing, as well as an epistemology of life. This is precisely the point at which the stakes of biopolitics emerge. Life itself falls within structures of power and becomes a political object as soon as it becomes a question of preserving it from its other, namely, death. In order to better preserve and protect individual and species’ life, an increase and extension of governmentality is required. It is under these conditions that the ‘politics of life’ tend to become both bio-politics and thanatopolitics. The intrinsic risk is one in which, in order to address those problems, biopowers need to decide and legislate on what can be considered as ‘truly’ alive, and establish a rigid and normative hierarchy, with human life in its actual existence at the top of the scale, and other living beings as inferior forms of life. This situation generates questions of ethics and jurisprudence that deserve to be explored in depth.

    The CIBB project members: Giuseppe Bianco, Marjorie Gracieuse, Miguel de Beistegui, Bill Fulford and Claudia Stein


    Third two-day workshop: 'Desire and Pleasure' 2013.

    Department of Philosophy, Social Sciences Building, University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7AL.
    Tel: +44 (0)24 7652 3421
    Who to contact
    Staff intranet
    Close this email form
    Page contact: Marjorie Gracieuse Last revised: Mon 14 May 2012
    • Sign in
    • |
    • Powered by Sitebuilder
    • |
    • © MMXII
    • |
    • Privacy
    • |
    • Accessibility